Memogate petition: Once bitten, Haqqani knocks on SC’s door again

Published: December 11, 2011
Haqqani filea an appeal challenging the registrar’s decision to turn down his application.  PHOTO: AFP/FILE

Haqqani filea an appeal challenging the registrar’s decision to turn down his application. PHOTO: AFP/FILE


Pakistan’s former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani seems adamant.

A day after Supreme Court Registrar Fakir Hussain returned his application with some objections, Haqqani filed an appeal on Saturday through his counsel Asma Jahangir challenging the registrar’s decision to turn down his application against the apex court’s December 1 order.

Haqqani is urging the apex court to recall its order on holding a probe into the memogate issue because it denied him the freedom of movement, sans a hearing.

The registrar on Friday had objected to the filing of the application against the order rather than a review petition.

The rejected application stated that the court has curtailed Haqqani’s movement and has also initiated a high-level investigation against him. “An impression has been created through the order that Haqqani was guilty of high treason,” the application said.

Asma said she would prefer an appeal against the order of the registrar before opting for a review petition. Appeals against the order of the registrar are usually placed before a judge of the Supreme Court in his chamber for a decision.

Through the application, Asma argued that an ex-parte interim order of December 1 was subject to recall or modification on the submission of a simple application after hearing the respondent. Besides, she contended, under the relevant Supreme Court rules, an application, not a review petition, was the proper remedy for recall of an ex-parte, interim order.

The counsel quoted the rule which said, “Nothing in these rules shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent powers of the court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court.”

A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court had earlier sought Haqqani’s reply, besides restraining him from travelling abroad, after hearing nine petitioners including PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif. The court had also named former FIA chief Tariq Khosa as head of the commission – however, Khosa has since declined.

The court marked December 19 for resuming the hearing of the Memogate case and to figure out what to do with the commission after Khosa’s refusal. Another important aspect of the case relates to the replies the court had sought from the president, COAS , the ISI chief and others.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 11th, 2011.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (17)

  • Mirza
    Dec 11, 2011 - 11:17AM

    The PCO SC should keep up with the history of being hostile to elected govts of PPP and eliminate its leaders. This is a new low in the SC history that a trial is directly started in SC and prompt relief is granted against the PPP leader. Let us close all the high courts of the country when it comes to cases against PPP. In particular all high courts of Sindh, Baluchistan, and KP be barred from dealing with PPP cases.


  • K. Salim Jahangir
    Dec 11, 2011 - 12:04PM

    It is too late Haqqani! You should have acted wisely & patriotically in your capacity as an ambassador & otherwise , now wait for the inquiry to conclude before you are allowed to leave the country.No one is trying to stigmatize or blame you with out reason,some have incontrovertible & irrefutable evidence against you & others.


  • gulbadsha
    Dec 11, 2011 - 12:23PM

    Seeking Justice from Ranjeet Sing( Nawaz Adleeya)?


  • Asif
    Dec 11, 2011 - 1:05PM

    What can one say?

    Instead of opposing Pakistan Army slavery to US, he wanted more Pakistan slavery to US.


  • shoaib sultan
    Dec 11, 2011 - 1:15PM

    He (HH) is the same man who issued visas for several thousand operatives of several immoral security companies, yes Raymond Davis the KILLER was also a employee of one of those companies.. HH shame on you. Pakistan Zindabad.Recommend

  • Khalid Rao
    Dec 11, 2011 - 1:22PM

    Mr. Haqqani, be Pakistani ,this country has given you a lot you should have taken care off.
    I read your book and believe you me I was so upset that on each page I have written about you and your personified ideas about military and mosque.
    Wait now, try to listen the music if you & the conscious are on same page then you stay calm ,let the court decide,they will listen you too.


  • tariqkun
    Dec 11, 2011 - 1:39PM

    but why don’t he sues ijaz mansur
    at first place? unless he sue ijaz mansur in a USA court it’s a done deal that he,s guilty.
    he,s gone to supreme court in the very next day after hi first application was rejected but why is he not suing ijaz mansur even after two months?
    and why asma jahangir file an application against mansur ijaz in a USA court on behalf of haqqani?


  • Junaid Khan
    Dec 11, 2011 - 2:00PM

    I agree 100 with tariqkun
    HH is so in love with US admin., he should have sued Mansoor there and then, right after that article was published.
    @Mirza this SC is the last hope for my country. don’t cry yet, its still your govt.

    and @gulbadsha, so now you wanted Zardari adalat as well :)


  • M Khan
    Dec 11, 2011 - 2:44PM

    The Supreme Court was right in its order for Mr. HH. It is unfortunate that HH wants to be treated as if he is above the law. Ms. AJ can refer to hundreds of case laws around the world and she’ll find that the SC was right in what they did. If Ms. AJ truly is a human rights activist then she should represent the thousands of prisoners rotting in Pakistani jails.
    Also it is about time that we should do whats best for our Great country Pakistan, rather than blindly follow our political parties knowing the damage they have caused Pakistan and its people.


  • Zaman khan
    Dec 11, 2011 - 6:13PM

    if Mr HH does not have a skeleton in his cupboard why is he upset. If he is not involved he must be happy with SC decision to hold an impartial inquiry so that his name is cleared.


  • Imran
    Dec 11, 2011 - 8:34PM

    Some people are brain dead! How can he sue anyone, when he is not allowed to leave the country.


  • Imran
    Dec 11, 2011 - 8:39PM

    @Zaman khan:
    ” If he is not involved he must be happy with SC decision to hold an impartial inquiry so that his name is cleared.”

    Impartial inquiry by this supreme court? The same PCO supreme court which puts someone on ECL without listening to him? And the judges who gave Musharraf the right to amend the constitution? And grant bails only to known terrorists, proclaimed offenders, and those resisting arrests, or running away from custody.


  • Imran
    Dec 11, 2011 - 8:41PM

    The blatant miscarriage of basic justice in the verdicts of these judges is now sickening.


  • Junaid Khan
    Dec 11, 2011 - 8:53PM

    @Imran… did you really say that??? lol…. do you know that HH has already sued NY times for their story of Mansoor Ejaz….

    Please read news papers before commenting…Recommend

  • Cautious
    Dec 12, 2011 - 3:33AM

    He has a point — the SC best roll in this affair is to adjudicate an appeal – not be quasi prosecutor and judge.


  • Loveuall845
    Dec 12, 2011 - 5:03AM

    “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor–he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation–he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city–he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared – Cicero, 42 B.C.E.”


  • ayesha
    Dec 12, 2011 - 6:58AM

    @Junaid Khan: “HH is so in love with US admin., he should have sued Mansoor there and then, right after that article was published.”

    His name was not included in the article – so he had no locus standii at that time to sue. Ijaz mentioned Haqqani’s name to the press more than a month after the article was published. Please get your facts straight.


More in Pakistan